Council reopens debate on Greek Theatre contract; votes to take up matter after reconsideration

Council members on March 6 reopened a contentious debate over the Greek Theatre concession contract, voting to take up the matter after a motion to reconsider earlier votes and extended public comment.

Councilmember Walters moved for reconsideration of the council's earlier vote on whether to consider item 40 (a Rule 16 jurisdiction motion related to the Greek Theatre concession). The first attempt to take up the jurisdiction question had failed on an earlier roll call, with the transcript recording a 7-4 vote against consideration. After additional debate and a reconsideration motion, the council again voted on whether to take up the matter that day and recorded 7 ayes and 3 noes.

Councilmembers pressing for review cited a memo from Ellen Oppenheim, general manager of the Department of Recreation and Parks, that warned of fiscal and operational risks if a new concession agreement is not executed. The memo, distributed to council members during the meeting, warned that "the department will forfeit revenue" and noted that "upon execution of a new contract, the concessionaire must make a one-time cash payment of $500,000" that would replenish the Greek Theatre Support Fund and support facility repairs and maintenance.

Supporters of asserting jurisdiction said the council should allow a public, city-level review because bids had been submitted and because the Recreation and Parks Commission had been unable to reach a decision. Councilmember Ridley-Thomas urged members who opposed taking jurisdiction to explain why the council should not act. "Why should we not assert jurisdiction?" Ridley-Thomas asked, inviting explanation from dissenters.

Opponents and procedural cautions focused on the council's limited formal authority over commission awards and on the council rules governing when an item may be taken up without committee review. The transcript includes repeated references to Rule 16, which requires extra votes to bring items that have not gone through committee directly to the floor; several council members noted that assertion of jurisdiction for a commission action is procedurally constrained and that a successful jurisdiction vote may be limited in the remedy it can provide (the council cannot itself award the contract, only direct rebidding or return the matter to the commission).

Speakers also flagged near-term scheduling and membership questions: the Recreation and Parks Commission had been deadlocked on the award, a commissioner had resigned, and the mayor has a period to appoint a replacement; council members noted that a new appointment could affect any subsequent commission decision. Councilmembers who supported taking up the matter also said delay could stall planned capital improvements and revenue increases, and could trigger additional consultant costs if the city rebids. The Recreation and Parks memo cited in the meeting estimated consultant costs for financial review and cost estimating at about $150,000 and said current construction inflation was being estimated at roughly 5% annually.

The transcript does not record a final vote on whether the council ultimately asserted jurisdiction over the concession award; it does record the procedural votes to reconsider and to take up the matter for the day and an extended public comment period that followed.